Writer and disability campaigner thrashed in Goa theatre for not standing up during national anthem

[illuminatidinesh]

LOL.... sure you are

I am the queen of england. Do come and meet me whenever you are in London. cheerios.

One doesnt need to be Queen of england to be in that commitee....
Fortunately Constitution Of India ensures Equal right for Differently abled persons too
A Person with disability must be in that committee
The service delivery team should be in that team as well...
Regional partners and stake holders should be in that Committee...
You can assume me to be part of anything which I stated that is ur Fundamental right isnt it?

 

[TimePass]

One doesnt need to be Queen of england to be in that commitee....
Fortunately Constitution Of India ensures Equal right for Differently abled persons too
A Person with disability must be in that committee
The service delivery team should be in that team as well...
Regional partners and stake holders should be in that Committee...
You can assume me to be part of anything which I stated that is ur Fundamental right isnt it?

Do you have a point besides making a desperate attempt to find fame and recognition in an anonymous forum ?

 

[Spring Onion]

There were no wheelchair or crutches, probably the fellow would have been talking on phone or something, so an honest mistake probably by the couple

respect for such things cannot be imposed by force.

And when was the last time Indians did not prefer religious song vande mataram over national anthem.

It is the pathetic attitude by hyper national Indians.

 

[illuminatidinesh]

Nonsense, I meant it as a word of praise for you. lol.

U dint understand what I meant , Perhaps you are mentally unstable. Get an appointment with me , I promise not to charge any fee for u. Its kind of really hard to rectify u but I will give it a try.
Oh the condition could worsen till then, So dont qoute me further.

@WebMaster @Horus Can you cleanse this thread including my posts which are offtopic....
My apologies

respect for such things cannot be imposed by force.

And when was the last time Indians did not prefer religious song vande mataram over national anthem.

It is the pathetic attitude by hyper national Indians.

Its purely lack of awareness, I woudnt bring religion into this.
And it doesnt end with Indians alone for that matter.

 

[Robinhood Pandey]

respect for such things cannot be imposed by force.

And when was the last time Indians did not prefer religious song vande mataram over national anthem.

It is the pathetic attitude by hyper national Indians.

How Vande matram came into picture here ?

 

[Fireurimagination]

respect for such things cannot be imposed by force.

And when was the last time Indians did not prefer religious song vande mataram over national anthem.

It is the pathetic attitude by hyper national Indians.

This is a very seperate case wherein the person was disabled and the person who asked him to stand up didn't knew the same. There have been a couple of instances when somebody played smart @ss and refused to standup, then it becomes a debatable issue not the said case

 

[TimePass]

U dint understand what I meant , Perhaps you are mentally unstable. Get an appointment with me , I promise not to charge any fee for u. Its kind of really hard to rectify u but I will give it a try.
Oh the condition could worsen till then, So dont qoute me further.

Oh I understood you perfectly well.

A loser who wants to feel good by claiming false identity and someone who wants to feel self righteous by issuing 'certificates' to others and abusing others.

If I ever took an appointment to meet with a loser like you, I would seriously have to get my head checked

 

[Tom M]

Well the couple were also exercising their right to Free Speech guaranteed by the constitution just a minor misunderstanding and nothing else

Does Freedom of speech mean touching someone else's body ??

 

[TimePass]

Does Freedom of speech mean touching someone else's body ??

Freedom can also mean to touch your own body while in a public theatre. Do you agree ?

 

[gubbi]

Then there is something called a SOCIAL CONTRACT. Its an unwritten social code and values.

Now who determines what constitutes this social contract? What social codes and values? Who make up that list? Is it constitutional? Is it lawful? Does it say anywhere in the Constitution that one HAS to stand up during the recitation of the National Anthem? Does it say that a civilian HAS to salute?
Which code are you referring to? Are those codes legally binding and who enforces those? Is such enforcement legal/constitutional?
Just asking a few questions, I need to know according to you what my rights are, right?

 

[TimePass]

Now who determines what constitutes this social contract? What social codes and values? Who make up that list? Is it constitutional? Is it lawful? Does it say anywhere in the Constitution that one HAS to stand up during the recitation of the National Anthem? Does it say that a civilian HAS to salute?
Which code are you referring to? Are those codes legally binding and who enforces those? Is such enforcement legal/constitutional?
Just asking a few questions, I need to know according to you what my rights are, right?

Living in society educates you in social etiquette. About what constitutes respect and what constitutes disrespect.

I have already explained the difference between what is required under the constitution and what is required under civil social behaviour.

If you have doubts then read ALL my posts and then quote the parts where you disagree. I have no desire to repeat myself to compensate for your laziness.

There is a saying "latho ke bhoot batho se nahi manteh" , so any ignorance people like you may have regarding respectful behaviour is quickly remedied with a knock on the head.

Now you can search the constitution for the part where it says the head can be knocked. Does that answer all your questions ?

 

[gubbi]

Living in society educates you in social etiquette. About what constitutes respect and what constitutes disrespect.

I have already explained the difference between what is required under the constitution and what is required under civil social behaviour. You understanding and comprehension of certain facts remains wanting.

If you have doubts then read ALL my posts and then quote the parts where you disagree. I have no desire to repeat myself to compensate for your laziness.

There is a saying "latho ke bhoot batho se nahi manteh" , so any ignorance people like you may have regarding respectful behaviour is quickly remedied with a knock on the head.

Now you can search the constitution for the part where it says the head can be knocked. Does that answer all your questions ?

Wow, you are a pretty aggressive 'patriotic' individual! Kudos.

So, since you mention 'etiquette' here's the thing. No one can force another person to follow etiquette. You may ostracize that person who refuses to follow social behavior, but you cannot, I repeat, cannot force that person to follow it. You neither have the right nor the authority to enforce anyone to behave according to what YOU consider 'etiquettes'. Its actually illegal, check it out.
Since you talk about "latho ke bhoot batho se nahi manteh", remember it goes the other way too. Consider this scenario: I can choose to disrespect you and I will disrespect you (FYI, if you didn't know, one actually needs to earn respect). In doing so, I will be well within my rights. But if it comes to threatening me with physical harm, then you, my friend, will be committing a crime. Check that one out too. Be careful how and who you threaten. Also, with all due respect, there also a provision for self-defense. So if I ever encounter such bhakths or 'enforcers' or vigilantes, rest assured, my right to self-defense will be exercised.

So there. I did read all your drivel, and am pretty impressed that you believe you are right! Good for you. Now keep it in your chaddi and let others be.

 

[illuminatidinesh]

Wow, you are a pretty aggressive 'patriotic' individual! Kudos.

So, since you mention 'etiquette' here's the thing. No one can force another person to follow etiquette. You may ostracize that person who refuses to follow social behavior, but you cannot, I repeat, cannot force that person to follow it. You neither have the right nor the authority to enforce anyone to behave according to what YOU consider 'etiquettes'. Its actually illegal, check it out.
Since you talk about "latho ke bhoot batho se nahi manteh", remember it goes the other way too. Consider this scenario: I can choose to disrespect you and I will disrespect you (FYI, if you didn't know, one actually needs to earn respect). In doing so, I will be well within my rights. But if it comes to threatening me with physical harm, then you, my friend, will be committing a crime. Check that one out too. Be careful how and who you threaten. Also, with all due respect, there also a provision for self-defense. So if I ever encounter such bhakths or 'enforcers' or vigilantes, rest assured, my right to self-defense will be exercised.

So there. I did read all your drivel, and am pretty impressed that you believe you are right! Good for you. Now keep it in your chaddi and let others be.

The problem is these so called bla bla bla idiots have no idea what the constitution of India says .
I would suggest you to stop wasting ur precious time as I did.

To others I would like you to read this if time permits.
The persons with disabilities (PWD) (equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation) act, 1995
“The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995” had come into enforcement on February 7, 1996. It is a significant step which ensures equal opportunities for the people with disabilities and their full participation in the nation building. The Act provides for both the preventive and promotional aspects of rehabilitation like education, employment and vocational training, reservation, research and manpower development, creation of barrier- free environment, rehabilitation of persons with disability, unemployment allowance for the disabled, special insurance scheme for the disabled employees and establishment of homes for persons with severe disability etc.
http://vikaspedia.in/education/pare...al-rights-of-the-disabled-in-india#section-12
This is not complete but enough to educate one about Disabilities

Some extracts from our constitution

1. Article 15(1) enjoins on the Government not to discriminate against any citizen of India (including disabled) on the ground of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.
2. Article 15 (2) States that no citizen (including the disabled) shall be subjected to any disability, liability, restriction or condition on any of the above grounds in the matter of their access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment or in the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of government funds or dedicated to the use of the general public. Women and children and those belonging to any socially and educationally backward classes or the Scheduled Castes & Tribes can be given the benefit of special laws or special provisions made by the State

Now this is important aspect from PWD act 1995
Non-Discrimination

• Public building, rail compartments, buses, ships and air-crafts will be designed to give easy access to the disabled people.
• In all public places and in waiting rooms, the toilets shall be wheel chair accessible. Braille and sound symbols are also to be provided in all elevators (lifts).
• All the places of public utility shall be made barrier- free by providing the ramps.

DO WE HAVE ALL THE ABOVE STATED IN OUR COUNTRY?
We are sure moving in that direction but very slowly.

Now something interesting
Grievance Redressal

• In case of violation of the rights as prescribed in this act, people with disabilities may move an application to the
• Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities in the Centre, or
• Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities in the State.
  

Chapter 12
58. The Chief Commissioner shall:

(a) coordinate the work of the Commissioners;

(b) monitor the utilization of funds disbursed by the Central Government;

(c) take steps to safeguard the rights and facilities made available to persons with disabilities;

(d) submit reports to the Central Government on the implementation of the Act at such intervals as that Government may prescribe.

Chief Commissioner to look into complaints with respect to deprivation of rights of persons with
disabilities.
59. Without prejudice to the provisions of section 58 the chief Commissioner may on his own motion or on the application of any aggrieved person or otherwise look into complaints with respect to matters relating to:

(a) deprivation of rights of persons with disabilities;
Complaint will be directed to this person against the Theater and district rehabilitation officer (or equivalent) for non implementation of Disabled friendly barrier free environment in this particular case.

(b) non-implementation of laws, rules, bye-laws, regulations, executive orders guidelines or instructions made or issued hy the appropriate Governments and the local authorities for the welfare and protection of rights or persons with disabilities

 

[TimePass]

Wow, you are a pretty aggressive 'patriotic' individual! Kudos.

So, since you mention 'etiquette' here's the thing. No one can force another person to follow etiquette. You may ostracize that person who refuses to follow social behavior, but you cannot, I repeat, cannot force that person to follow it. You neither have the right nor the authority to enforce anyone to behave according to what YOU consider 'etiquettes'. Its actually illegal, check it out.
Since you talk about "latho ke bhoot batho se nahi manteh", remember it goes the other way too. Consider this scenario: I can choose to disrespect you and I will disrespect you (FYI, if you didn't know, one actually needs to earn respect). In doing so, I will be well within my rights. But if it comes to threatening me with physical harm, then you, my friend, will be committing a crime. Check that one out too. Be careful how and who you threaten. Also, with all due respect, there also a provision for self-defense. So if I ever encounter such bhakths or 'enforcers' or vigilantes, rest assured, my right to self-defense will be exercised.

So there. I did read all your drivel, and am pretty impressed that you believe you are right! Good for you. Now keep it in your chaddi and let others be.

lol....I just responded your passive aggressive smart@ss reply with a small aggression of my own. Gave you exactly what you deserve.

You would be surprised how the world works by enforcing etiquette. Be it diplomatic 'protocols' or calling your boss 'sir'.

You yourself admitted to that that force by mentioning "Ostracising someone" . Only you choose to categorise that force to suite your argument.

In real life it goes beyond social ostracisation, it can result in your boss humiliating you in public. It can lead to verbal assault. And in certain cases it will lead to physical assault.

You can try it yourself by carrying a lump of beef inside a temple or a carcass of a Pig inside a mosque. You will then suddenly realise that all your hot air about no use of force to counter respect is just that, hot air.

Now try wearing a pair of slippers inside any famous temple. See how they treat you and if you can file criminal charges against the people who will physically throw you out.

And if you then cry violation of "freedom", you will end up in jail for 'disrespecting religious sentiment".

I challenge you to try it. Walk the Talk. I wish you all the best in conducting that social experiment in 'Respect'. Only first arrange for bail money and maybe a medical ambulance.

Now I will be pretty impressed if you actually have the courage to practice what you preach. But you don't. Like all fake liberals you can only make empty threats and name calling. So happy chaddi to you too. drivel indeed.

 

[fallstuff]

Are you joking ? One does not have to be a 'soldier' to show respect when the National anthem is playing.

Every body has to stand when the national anthem is playing, not only soldiers. IF you cannot stand, the next thing you do is salute. THAT is how you show respect.

Its unlikely the other person would have 'hit' in the traditional use of the word, he would have given that guy a hard swipe or a hard tap.

But that person also had the decency to Apologise for his behaviour after realising the man was handicapped. That shows more decency than the handicapped man who did not even salute when the anthem was playing.

Our place not being handicap friend is a fact but that's a totally different argument and topic and has nothing to do with what happened. If we were handicap friendly, then the message should have asked the handicapped people to salute for the national anthem.

This is not an ugly incident, but just an incident where,

1. Disrespect was shown by handicapped person
2. Disrespect was shown by person who hit the handicap person
3. Apology was given by the person who hit.
4. The couple who started the fracas felt suitably ashamed to leave the theatre before the movie started.
5. The handicapped person continues to feel no sense of what he did wrong, instead chose to focus on all that others did wrong.
6. BBC seeing an excellent opportunity to undermine patriotism in India.
7. Children of Macaulay gulping down bbc propaganda.


SO yes, for correcting something. one HAS to recognise and admit the mistakes. Can you ?

There is no such law in India which requires a person to stand up when National Anthem in being played. The home ministry makes a suggestion only.

The Home Ministry rules state:

"Whenever the Anthem is sung or played, the audience shall stand to
attention. However, when in the course of a newsreel or documentary the
Anthem is played as a part of the film, it is not expected of the audience to stand as standing is bound to interrupt the exhibition of the film and
would create disorder and confusion rather than add to the dignity of the
Anthem."

So as you see it is just a mere suggestion that people stand up.

However, folks that where harassing the man on wheelchair for not standing up actually broke the law as they were creating a fracas when the national anthem was being played,

Here is the penal code,

"according to the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act 1971, anyone who intentionally prevents the singing of the Indian National Anthem or causes disturbances to any assembly engaged in such singing shall be punished with imprisonment for a term, which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both"